From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jharris(at)tvi(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Inline PL/pgSQL |
Date: | 2005-05-09 18:18:10 |
Message-ID: | 427FA962.9030900@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>> As for implementation, I think it would obviously be best to leave
>> plpgsql on its own as a PL but maybe change BEGIN and DECLARE in the
>> normal parser and have the system generate/execute a function on the
>> fly. Or, maybe it would be better to integrate plpgsql. Or, I may
>> just be crazy.
>>
>> Would anyone else ever benefit from inline functions?
>
>
> Well I could see inline functions being useful for debugging a
> function during development but I don't think I would want a bunch of
> plPGSQL mucking up my pretty SQL :)
>
>
Then don't put it there ;-)
I think you'd need to do something like this:
PERFORM language plpgsql $$
-- some plpgsql stuff here
$$;
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dann Corbit | 2005-05-09 18:41:05 | Re: Can we get patents? |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-05-09 18:08:13 | Re: Inline PL/pgSQL |